Advance cue bids

[cwiggins]

Does anyone have a set of rules as to when a bid is an advance cue bid? If it makes a difference, we are playing 2/1 GF bidding.

 

"Everyone" seems to advance cue bids, but I've found very little to sort them out.

 

One thing is clear: if you bid a natural NT and then bid a suit, it is an advance cue bid. E.g.

 

1S 2N (12-15 balanced GF)

3D 4C = cue bid in support of diamonds

 

 

 

After that, it starts gets muddy.

 

Rule 1: a new suit at the four level is an advance cue bid. (Other agreements are possible, but this seems eminently playable.)

 

In an old book by Klinger:

1S 2D

3S 4D

4H = advance cue bid for diamonds Both a new suit at the four level and opener cannot possibly have hearts.

 

1S 2D

3S 4C

 

It seems this should be an advance cue bid: a new suit at the four level.

 

 

But can there be advance cue bids below the four level? That brings me to the sequence that caused the trouble:

1H 1S

2H 3C

3N 4H

 

With a 6-card spades suit, a doubleton heart, and possible slam ambitions if partner is maximum with a spade fit, I bid 3C (a suit maybe strength showing for sure; possible ) and then signed off in hearts.

 

Partner took 3C as an advance cue bid in support of hearts with some type of balanced hand (over 2H, both 4C and 4D would have been splinters with slam interest). I probably have 5 spades; with only four and a balanced hand I would have responded 2NT right away (balanced GF hand). So he thought my shape was five (maybe six) spades, two hearts and 3-3 or 4-2 in the other suits.

 

I feel like Rule 2 is: unless a suit is agreed, a cue bid below the four level cannot be an advance cue bid.

 

This would cover

1S 2D

3D 3H

3N 4D = 3H was a cue bid, not a game try

 

but make clear that the above sequence is not a cue bid. (But maybe it should be.)

 

Thanks for any help you can provide.

[EricK]

I don't think some of your examples are what I would call advanced cue bids.

 

An example of an advanced cue bid (as I understand the term) is something like

 

1♠ 2♠

3♦ 3♠

4♣

 

The 3♦ is ostensibly a game try. But by overruling partner's decision you are showing that it was in fact a cue bid.

 

Another is

1♦ 3♦

3♥ 3NT

4♣

 

Here, 3♥ is ostensibly a probe for NT. When partner duly bids NT, your 4♣ bid reveals the 3♥ bid to be an advanced cue bid.

 

Your examples seem to be of a different type. i.e where support is implied by the cue bid. I don't know the term for this. Maybe "implicit cue bid" would do.

[joshs]

Man. I hate the concept of advance cue bids. I play:

all suit bids below 3N (with the possibly exception of 3S when hearts is the agreed suit) are natural (showing length or values) not necessarily aces.

 

In the auction:

1S-1S-3D-3S-4C

 

I would expect opener to have 3+ diamonds on the side and a club cuebid. Opener has said "I don't care that 3D didn't excite you, I am still interested in slam". I would expect something like: KQxxxxx x AKx AQ where the trump ace and either the CK or the DQ are enough for slam. You are unlikely to find partner with the DQ after his 3S bid but the CK is still possible.

 

In the auction:

1D-2D(forcing)-2S-3C-3N-4D you could interprete 3C as an "advanced cue", since he obviously didn't want to play 3N, but using 3C as natural, and letting partner know how well your hands fit is even more useful, in my opinion.

 

E.G. If opener's hand is : QJxx Axx Kxxx Axx and just heard this auction he should like his hand. He is probably facing something like Axx x AQxx KQxxx or maybe a better hand but a doubleton heart (Axx xx AQJx KQJx). Slam is not guaranteed yet, but your hand is promising for slam. If Opener's had the heart K instead of the ace, its a much worse hand.

 

Just my 2 bits.

[000002]

it's clear to me: a bid seeking for slam is NOT an natural bidding found on logic,it is advanced cuebid.